[documentation] Add OpenStreetMap benchmarks
This commit is contained in:
Ciprian Dorin Craciun
parent
502d292f17
commit
6c79faade4
1 changed files with 120 additions and 0 deletions
|
|
@ -991,6 +991,126 @@ Methodology notes
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
OpenStreetMap tiles
|
||||
-------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Scenario notes
|
||||
..............
|
||||
|
||||
As a benchmark much closer to the "real world" use-cases for ``kawipiko`` I've done the following:
|
||||
|
||||
* downloaded from OpenStreetMap servers all tiles for my home town (from zoom level 0 to zoom level 19), which resulted in:
|
||||
|
||||
* around ~250K PNG files totaling ~330 MiB;
|
||||
* with an average of 1.3 KiB and a median of 103B; (i.e. lots of extreemly small files;)
|
||||
* occupying actualy around 1.1 GiB of storage (on Ext4) due to file-system overheads;
|
||||
|
||||
* created a CDB archive, which resulted in:
|
||||
|
||||
* a single file totaling ~376 MiB (both "apparent" and "occupied" storage); (i.e. no storage space wasted;)
|
||||
* which contains only ~100K PNG files, due to elimination of duplicate PNG files; (i.e. at higher zoom levels, the tiles start to repeat;)
|
||||
|
||||
* listed all the available tiles, and benchmarked both ``kawipiko`` and NGinx, with 16K concurrent connections;
|
||||
* the methodology is the same one described above, with the following changes:
|
||||
|
||||
* the host used in benchmarks has a desktop-grade Intel Core i7 4770 (i.e. 4th generation, about 6 years old) with 4 physical cores and 32 GiB of RAM;
|
||||
* the files (both CDB and tiles folder) were put in ``tmpfs``;
|
||||
* both ``kawipiko``, NGinx and ``wrk`` were configured to use 8 threads / processes, and were pinned on two separate physical cores each;
|
||||
* (the host had almost nothing running on it except the minimal required services;)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Results notes
|
||||
.............
|
||||
|
||||
Based on my benchmark the following are my findings:
|
||||
|
||||
* ``kawipiko`` outperformed NGinx by ~25% in requests / second;
|
||||
* ``kawipiko`` outperformed NGinx by ~29% in average response latency;
|
||||
* ``kawipiko`` outperformed NGinx by ~40% in 90-percentile response latency;
|
||||
* ``kawipiko`` used ~6% less CPU while serving requests for 2 minutes;
|
||||
* ``kawipiko`` used ~25% less CPU per request;
|
||||
* NGinx used the least amount of RAM, meanwhile ``kawipiko`` (due to either in RAM loading or ``mmap`` usage) used around 1GiB of RAM;
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Results values
|
||||
..............
|
||||
|
||||
* ``kawipiko`` with ``--archive-inmem`` and ``--index-all`` (1 process, 8 threads): ::
|
||||
|
||||
Requests/sec: 238499.86
|
||||
Transfer/sec: 383.59MB
|
||||
|
||||
Running 2m test @ http://127.9.185.194:8080/
|
||||
8 threads and 16384 connections
|
||||
Thread Stats Avg Stdev Max +/- Stdev
|
||||
Latency 195.39ms 412.84ms 5.99s 92.33%
|
||||
Req/Sec 30.65k 10.20k 213.08k 79.41%
|
||||
Latency Distribution
|
||||
50% 28.02ms
|
||||
75% 221.17ms
|
||||
90% 472.41ms
|
||||
99% 2.19s
|
||||
28640139 requests in 2.00m, 44.98GB read
|
||||
Socket errors: connect 0, read 0, write 0, timeout 7032
|
||||
|
||||
* ``kawipiko`` with ``--archive-mmap`` (1 process, 8 threads): ::
|
||||
|
||||
Requests/sec: 237239.35
|
||||
Transfer/sec: 381.72MB
|
||||
|
||||
Running 2m test @ http://127.9.185.194:8080/
|
||||
8 threads and 16384 connections
|
||||
Thread Stats Avg Stdev Max +/- Stdev
|
||||
Latency 210.44ms 467.84ms 6.00s 92.57%
|
||||
Req/Sec 30.77k 12.29k 210.17k 86.67%
|
||||
Latency Distribution
|
||||
50% 26.51ms
|
||||
75% 221.63ms
|
||||
90% 494.93ms
|
||||
99% 2.67s
|
||||
28489533 requests in 2.00m, 44.77GB read
|
||||
Socket errors: connect 0, read 0, write 0, timeout 10730
|
||||
|
||||
* ``kawipiko`` with ``--archive-mmap`` (8 processes, 1 thread): ::
|
||||
|
||||
Requests/sec: 248266.83
|
||||
Transfer/sec: 399.29MB
|
||||
|
||||
Running 2m test @ http://127.9.185.194:8080/
|
||||
8 threads and 16384 connections
|
||||
Thread Stats Avg Stdev Max +/- Stdev
|
||||
Latency 209.30ms 469.05ms 5.98s 92.25%
|
||||
Req/Sec 31.86k 8.58k 83.99k 69.93%
|
||||
Latency Distribution
|
||||
50% 23.08ms
|
||||
75% 215.28ms
|
||||
90% 502.80ms
|
||||
99% 2.64s
|
||||
29816650 requests in 2.00m, 46.83GB read
|
||||
Socket errors: connect 0, read 0, write 0, timeout 15244
|
||||
|
||||
* NGinx (8 workers): ::
|
||||
|
||||
Requests/sec: 188255.32
|
||||
Transfer/sec: 302.88MB
|
||||
|
||||
Running 2m test @ http://127.9.185.194:8080/
|
||||
8 threads and 16384 connections
|
||||
Thread Stats Avg Stdev Max +/- Stdev
|
||||
Latency 266.18ms 538.72ms 5.93s 90.78%
|
||||
Req/Sec 24.15k 8.34k 106.48k 74.56%
|
||||
Latency Distribution
|
||||
50% 34.34ms
|
||||
75% 253.57ms
|
||||
90% 750.29ms
|
||||
99% 2.97s
|
||||
22607727 requests in 2.00m, 35.52GB read
|
||||
Socket errors: connect 0, read 109, write 0, timeout 16833
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Why CDB?
|
||||
========
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue